Question

When studying religions, scholars some times ask how far a religion is defined ideas of permanence or impermanence. Permanence can be defined as that which is everlasting and/or never changes. Impermanence, conversely, is that which is finite and/or is susceptible to change. With that said, the question is asking you to examine the religion of Hinduism through this lens of permanence/impermanence. In thinking about this question, I would encourage you to focus on specific Hindu beliefs (such as samsara, karma, moksha, dharma, caste system, view of the gods, etc.) and/or practices (meditation, asceticism, etc.). As always, there are arguments to be made on both sides of the fence here. I just want to see you make a case for one or the other.

With the above in mind, in organizing your response you must provide three examples that either or agree or disagree with the prompt. As always, please be sure that you place each of your examples in their own distinct paragraphs as well so that your reader is aware of your three positions.

Answer 1

Some points to consider

Hinduism mentions the state of impermanence numerous times. The religion is of the belief that nothing lasts for all eternity, lives go through the cycle of death and life (birth and rebirth). It views karma as a component that is subject to change as well - that karma works like a carry over system and can change as per the Dharma (duties) of the individual. This is contingent upon the number of good deeds and bad deeds, the consequences of which one will reap in their next birth. Hence, the continuity and impermanence.

It says that once a person has learnt all their lessons across their numerous life times, they edge closer towards the state of moksha - which is freedom from the human realm and breaking away from the constant cycle of birth. However, in a way, this final state is that of permanence as there is no journey beyond this point as the soul has achieved its true purpose, which is self actualization.